• Provide with a learning environment that allows for experiencing the benefits and challenges of multicultural and virtual team work.
• Increase students´ sensitivity and awareness about challenges in virtual collaboration by giving a chance to reflect on their own experiences intensively.
• Enable the acquisition of a holistic picture of activities in an internationally operating company by participating in an online business game.
• Enrich students´ understanding of different issues regarding the new ways of working from different perspectives (corporate infrastructure, leadership, etc.).
• Raise awareness and have discussions about the ethical and sustainability aspects of new ways of working and virtual collaboration.

Learning outcomes:

On successful completion of this course, the students will be able to:

• LO1: Discuss and evaluate social, ethical, and sustainability issues relating to new ways of working. [cognitive/analytical]
• LO2: Accurately identify and apply relevant theory within different specific contexts of virtual collaboration and the new ways of working. [cognitive/analytical]
• LO3: Apply decision making skills related to virtual collaboration – managing a business online. [professional/practical skills]
• LO4: Demonstrate the ability to formulate and present concise, insightful analyses which expos issues logically and coherently. [transferable skills]

Although class participation is not part of the graded component, students are required to attend at least 80% of lessons in order to remain eligible for grading. As each lesson has a portion where students either need to prepare an in-class presentation or have time to work on their group project, students are eager to attend all lessons as they do not want to miss out neither on content nor interaction with their colleagues.

Individual assessment: 60%, Group assessment: 40%

In details:

• Virtual simulation assignments (30 points) – individual assignments:
  • Individual reflection essay I (15 points), Individual reflection essay II (15 points). There are two simulation lessons. After each occasion students write their essays, therefore, they can track their own development. These assignments facilitate students in assessing and integrating their own learning throughout the simulation experience – key assessment part in experiential learning.
• Short tests (30 points) – individual assignments:
  • Test I: in-class test with open-questions (15 points): To objectively assess that students have learned and understood the fundamental concepts.
  • Test II: take home test – critical essay on a topic assigned by the course instructor (15 points). To objectively assess that students can demonstrate critical thinking while applying concepts learned in the course.
• Video project (40 points) – group assignment:
  • Topics are assigned by the course instructor and closely related to the course content
  • Content of the 10-minute-video:
    • literature review (15 points – critical analysis of a certain topic, identifying and applying relevant theories),
    • one interview with an expert in the field of respective video topic (8 points – enhancing practical skills),
    • personal reflection of the team on the respective topic (15 points – Integrating learning experience),
    • presentation of how the project was made (2 points).

Plagiarism: Aligned with the department regulations: “As an academic institution, the Department of International Management does not tolerate any form of academic dishonesty. Plagiarism encompasses presenting as one’s own the words, work, opinions, or factual information of someone else without giving that person credit, as well as borrowing the sequence of ideas, the arrangement of material, or the pattern of thought of someone else without proper acknowledgement. All discovered instances will result in an immediate decrease in grade of the assignment or exam. In severe cases, this may result in a failing grade for the assignment or exam. In addition, there will be an automatic decrease in overall grade. Consequently, this may result in the failure of the course. In the case of group work, the consequences will be extended to the entire team. For details see our code of conduct at www.jku.at/iim

Gera, S. (2013) Virtual teams versus face to face teams: A review of literature. IOSR Journal of Business and Management. 11(2), 01-04.

Kassner, M.P., Wesselmann, E.D., Law, A.T., Williams, K.D. (2012) Virtually Ostracized: Studying Ostracism in Immersive Virtual Environments. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. 15(8), 399-403.

Kock, N. (2005) Media Richness or Media Naturalness? The Evolution of Our Biological Communication Aparatus and Its Influence on Our Behavior Toward E-Communication Tools. IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication. 48(2), 117-130.

Hall. E. T., Hall. M. R. (2003): Key Concepts – Underlying Structures of Culture in Understanding cultural differences by Edward T. Hall and Mildred Reed Hall.151-162.

Ivanaj, S. & Bozon, C. (2016) Trust Building In Managing Virtual Teams, 115-121. Cheltenham, Glos: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited.

Johns, T. & Gratton, L. (2013) The Third Wave Of Virtual Work. Harvard Business Review. January-February 2013, 66-73.

Ten Brummelhuis, L.L., Bakker, A.B., Hetland, J. & Keulemans, L. (2012) Do new ways of working foster work engagement? Psicothema. 24(1), 113-120.

De Leede, J., Kraan, K.O., den Hengst, M. & van Hooff, M.L.M. (2008) Conditions for innovation behaviour of virtual team members: a ‘high-road’ for internationally dispersed virtual teams. The Journal of E-working. 2, 22-46.

Narain, A. (2014) Are Face-to-Face Teams More Creative than Virtual Teams? Retrieved February 9, 2016 from: http://www.sesp.northwestern.edu/masters-learning-and-organizational-change/knowledge-lens/stories/2014/are-face-to-face-teams-more-creative-than-virtual-teams.html - please use the hyperlink to access the article online.

Wang, E., Myers, M.D. & Sundaram, D. (2012) Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants: Towards a Model of Digital Fluency. ECIS European Conference on Information Systems 2012 Proceedings. Paper 39.

Guillot-Soulez, C. & Soulez, S. (2014) On the heterogeneity of generation Y job preferences. Employee Relations. 36(4), 319-332.

Other materials can be retrieved from Moodle and/or will be announced in class.